Weekly newsletter: October 8, 2024

Oct. 8

Hi everyone!

Thanksgiving is coming up, and the weather is certainly cooling down. With overnight temperatures getting close to freezing, it may be worth considering turning off your outdoor faucets soon.

Last Thursday, I hosted Mayor Sutcliffe for a tour of Barrhaven East. We stopped by the police station construction site, a few local businesses, and highlighted some traffic needs in our community.

I also used the opportunity to highlight my ongoing concerns about the sprung structure shelter proposal, which staff continue to be working on.

Speaking of sprung structure shelters, I have a relatively significant update!

(Sorry, this is a long newsletter.)

Sprung structure shelter – update five

Technical site evaluations by independent engineering firm to be complete by month’s end. References and previous newsletter updates about sprung structure shelters can be found at Ward24.ca (under the sprung structure shelters tab).

Residents and long-time readers will recall my position against using sprung structure shelters, which remains the same today.

The proposal involves a land selection process to find two suitable sites in Ottawa to host one sprung structure each to house asylum seekers. Staff also noted if the use for asylum seekers is no longer required, an option exists to convert the structure for use as an overflow shelter for unhoused individuals.

A long list of municipally owned, serviced, and ready-to-use parcels was whittled down to a short list which included a site in Barrhaven East at 1025 Greenbank Road, at the northeast corner of the Highbury Park intersection.

Shortly after the proposal was publicised, Councillor Hill and I raised several concerns with the Mayor and staff, which included the fact the list of properties considered, the site selection criteria, and the scoring criteria that led to the initial short-list were not released. We also opposed the built form, poor use of public funds, and location.

As part of their argument, staff claimed that not proceeding with sprung structure shelters will jeopardise up to $185 million of provincial and federal funding. This is wholly untrue.

Provincial funding is conditional on federal funding, which is provided through the Interim Housing Assistance Programme (IHAP), which mentions the provisioning of temporary accommodations for newcomers. Temporary accommodations are not limited to sprung structure shelters as staff claim and include options currently in use like hotels and motels.

Following an extensive but positive meeting back in July, staff accepted our feedback and agreed to re-examine the assumptions they made earlier in the process.

Staff also agreed to share the extensive list of sites initially considered, the scoring criteria that led to the short-list, and to look further into the nuances of the federal government funding stream.

Unfortunately, we are still waiting. Further, it my understanding that a draft memo with the extensive list of sites considered and the scoring criteria that led to the short-list was prepared in July but has remained on hold since.

Mea culpa

I first want to address the vote at Council which led us to where we are.

Back in October 2023, the Mayor and Councillor Dudas (as chair of the Community Services Committee) convened an emergency shelter crisis task force to expedite short-term solutions to address shelter capacity.

As part of that work, four motions were added to the agenda at the end of a November 2023 Council meeting to be voted on immediately, one of which were to direct staff to explore the option of sprung structures and other semi-permanent facility options.

All four motions passed unanimously.

Typically, notices for motions are provided one meeting before they are discussed to provide time for Councillors to process and research the matter to be voted on. Sometimes, items are walked on for an immediate vote usually due to a time sensitivity.

The four motions were not minor tweaks. They were major policy matters and should not have been walked on. That was the first time it happened for something major this term of Council.

Had I dissented, it would not have changed the outcome of the otherwise unanimous vote, but it was still a major rookie mistake. I have not made this mistake since, nor will I make it again.

Additional sites considered

As part of their work, staff added a few more sites for consideration. Just like the original list of sites, these additions had to be serviced and ready-to-use, but unlike the original list, these additions include federal properties.

A few weeks ago, staff notified me about a second site in Barrhaven East added for consideration, the field between Woodroffe and the Nepean Woods Park and Ride.

The site at Nepean Woods is one of a few new locations under consideration. Though staff did not share a list, they did share some of the other sites considered in this “second sweep,” which consists mostly of underused park and rides and federal lands.

Like the site at Greenbank/Highbury Park, though, its selection for consideration does not mean it’s a done deal, and nothing is proceeding right now.

In fact, a significant update staff provided yesterday includes a timeline of the ongoing work and next steps.

Independent site assessments

Along with the additional sites, staff have hired an independent engineering firm to assess the viability of each site to host a sprung structure. Factors include physical (slope and lot size), social (nearby amenities and services), and community (vulnerable uses and other considerations).

Sites assessed and to be assessed include those on the original short-list, the original longer list, and those added over the summer. This is the work some residents observed at the Greenbank/Highbury Park site mid-last month.

Upon completion of their assessments, the engineering firm will compile a report for staff, which staff have said will be shared with Council at the end of October or early-November.

Unfortunately, as my motion to withdraw staff’s delegated authority back in July failed three votes to 21, the report does not require Council or Committee’s approval.

That means it’s very possible the two sites ranked highest by the report will be automatically selected for a sprung structure shelter, unless the Mayor and the majority of my colleagues agree to reopen the item at Council.

After that point, rezoning applications for the selected sites will begin, which includes a mandatory public hearing component through the Planning and Housing Committee.

List of sites, selection criteria

I have an obligation as your elected City Councillor to be open and transparent about my actions and decision making. Though it’s enshrined in our Code of Conduct, it’s still my commitment to you.

Though the Code of Conduct for Members of Council↗ does speak to safeguarding confidential information, none of the information so far relating to sprung structure shelters meet confidentiality criteria.

You’ve known what I know, but sometimes with a bit of a lag while I sought clarity, extra information, or otherwise.

At the Council meeting and staff meeting in July, as well as on several occasions since, staff were requested to share the full list of properties to considered and the selection criteria which led to the original short list.

That list has yet to be shared, although it’s my understanding a draft memo with the requested information was made ready in July but has been kept on hold since.

Yesterday, my office filed an information request under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (MFIPPA) to obtain all information and documents relating to sprung structure shelters, including the list of all sites considered and selection criteria, among other items.

(MFIPPA requests are the municipal equivalent to ATIPs at the federal level. Both are sometimes referred to as freedom of information requests.)

Staff have up to 30 calendar days to complete the request. Upon receipt of the requested information, I will read and understand it, then share it with you.

Better options

At the same time, Councillor Hill and I have made arguments for options which are more dignified and a more responsible long-term use of public funds using rapid construction/modular buildings and scaling up existing embedded programmes.

For example, Kitchener-Waterloo proved it’s possible to take a project from concept to occupancy affordably and within a year (contrast that with our temporary structure’s 12-to-18-month timeline).

Barrhaven also hosts several small settings embedded in the community where asylees and refugees are introduced to Canadian life. We actually have the most of these types of homes compared to other communities in Ottawa!

Council can and must consider better options, under similar or better timelines and costs, which are achievable within the current federal funding stream. We must provide better outcomes for the community, service providers, asylum seekers, and potentially unhoused individuals.

We must continue and further scale up the great progress made in our housing strategy to seek out permanent solutions, including through building acquisition/retrofit and scaling up transitional housing programmes, both of which staff are already doing. The emergency shelter cycle cannot be further perpetuated and expanded.

What’s next

I appreciate the patience residents and the business community have afforded me over the last three months, and I understand many are getting anxious and impatient. I don’t blame anyone—it’s a completely warranted feeling.

You have my continued commitment to be open and transparent, and that I will stand for the best interests of Barrhaven to the best of my ability.

I will organise public information and engagement sessions if staff go ahead with development applications a sprung structure shelter in Barrhaven.

Additionally, if it gets there, I will fully inform you of the rezoning process, its mandatory public hearing, and how you can take part.

Barrhaven is a welcoming and wonderful community. Between one-third and half of our neighbours came from somewhere else to call Canada home to make a living and raise a family.

We must ensure we achieve the best outcome for everybody involved. Sprung structure shelters are an unacceptable form of housing for anyone, which compounded by an underrepresentation of available social services in our community, sets up asylum seekers and the host community up for failure.

Expect the next substantial update at the end of October or early-November.

Previous newsletter updates about the spring structure shelters can be found at Ward24.ca, under the sprung structure shelters tab.

O-Train Line 2 trial running

Earliest possible opening date is 18 November 2024, if trial running is perfect.

OC Transpo staff have released the schedule and criteria for Trillium Line↗ (O-Train lines 2 and 4) trial running, which began yesterday.

Trial running will demonstrate if all elements of the system are ready for passenger service, representing the culmination of months of testing, basically a “final exam” for TransitNEXT, the construction contractor.

Trial running consists of two phases and will be a minimum of 21 days. Industry best practices, lessons learned from the Confederation Line, and recommendations from the light rail public inquiry have been incorporated into the process.

The milestone means TransitNEXT have completed all the prerequisites for trial running to begin, as assessed by city staff and independent third-party certifiers.

Phase One - Simulated passenger service

The first phase of trial running requires the line to operate full-service schedules for a minimum of 14 days, simulating the conditions of normal passenger service.

A minimum on-time performance of 98.5 per cent averaged over 14 consecutive days must be maintained. The simulation period will be extended until the 98.5 per cent average across 14 consecutive days is met or exceeded.

Issues that impact daily performance will be validated by an independent certifier, who assigns it either as a city cause or a TransitNEXT cause in accordance with the project agreement. This means some issues may not be counted against TransitNEXT’s daily performance score.

Metrics

The metrics below inform the overall progress of the simulated passenger service phase of trial running.

Daily TransitNEXT performance is the measure of on-time performance within TransitNEXT’s control, based on trains on both lines departing end stations no more than 30 seconds after its scheduled departure time without compromising required dwell times.

The percentage is calculated using on-time departures as a fraction of the total scheduled departures for that day. For example, of 338 scheduled departures on a weekday, if 330 trips depart on time, a score of 97.63 per cent is achieved, which counts against the 98.5 rolling average.

The 14-day rolling average is calculated by adding up each day’s performance score, divided by the number of days since trial running began, up to 14. For example, if the 14 consecutive days returned scores of 99, 87, 100, 100, 100, 98, 98, 99, 99, 100, 98, 73, 76, and 100, the rolling average is 94.79 per cent, and the trial running will need to continue past the initial 14 days.

The minimum days to meet project agreement standard is 14 days, and the rolling average must meet or exceed 98.5 per cent. Scores to calculate the rolling average must be from 14 consecutive days.

Some common issues identified during simulated passenger service may include:

Signalling system – includes equipment that detects train locations and manages timetables.
Track – includes switches and rail profile.
Communications system – includes intrusion detection (e.g. people on tracks), security cameras, and other data remotely accessed by the transit operations control centre.
Vehicles – includes climate control, on-board security cameras, traction issues, and a range of error codes.
Operations – includes emergency brake applications, operator availability, and excess station dwell times.

Phase Two – Scenarios

Upon successful completion of simulated passenger service, the second phase of trial running can begin.

Lasting seven days, the aim of the second phase is for operations and maintenance staff to work through various scenarios that could occur when lines 2 and 4 are in service. Possible scenarios range from simple issues like door faults to major issues like evacuations between stations.

Though there is no scoring component, the scenarios will allow staff time to further assess and finesse operating procedures, identify gaps, and validate technical systems.

Oversight

Independent certifiers A.W. Hooker↗ and Ricardo Rail↗ have been hired to monitor and validate progress, as well as to help determine issue causes when they arise.

During the trial running period, Council will receive reports on weekdays summarising the previous day’s results. Monday reports will include the results from the weekend. The first daily report will be released Tuesday 8 October.

Reports will be published and publicly accessible at OCTranspo.com’s new trial running↗ webpage. Media availabilities will also be held each weekday to review performance reports.

After trial running

Following the successful completion of both phases of trial running, Council will receive a full report and briefing on the results. The project will then move towards substantial completion, final readiness work, and regulatory approvals from federal bodies, a process which will take a minimum of three weeks.

Upon completion of those contractual and regulatory requirements, the Trillium Line will move towards service launch for transit customers. At that point, an opening date will be shared publicly.

As of 3 October 2024, the earliest possible opening date for service is 18 November 2024, assuming trial running is perfect and no delays in the contractual and regulatory approval process.

Bus network changes

The realigned bus network (formally New Ways to Bus) will not be launched until the spring 2025 schedule cycle. In the interim, three existing bus routes will be adjusted or extended to service Limebank Station, details of which will be shared in the coming weeks.

Other than the interim adjustments/extensions, the current bus network will continue to operate after lines 2 and 4 open. Barrhaven East residents will have the new Bowesville Station park and ride↗, located at the southeast corner of Earl Armstrong/Bowesville, available for use after the line opens for passenger service.

Launch of the realigned bus network will happen Sunday 27 April 2025. More information about the launch will be shared closer to the date, but new maps and schedules, including a travel planner, are available at OC Transpo’s New Ways to Bus↗ webpage.